If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"I don't care if they tap our line. I am a law abiding citizen!"

All too often do I hear this comment when the topic of brought up. So many people who support the patriot act, or people who are indifferent, often make that statement. "What's the big deal if they tap our lines? If we have nothing to hide, then we have nothing to worry about, right?"

Do these people not realize that statements like this - a blatant statement if apathy, shows the government that people are just going to roll over as they take rights away, one by one? They'll develop the attitude of "Well there was certainly no fuss there, so let's see how far we can push it!"

They've already infringed on a number of the amendments, and they will continue to do so unless people continue to fight and support it. Just because there are a few amendments that you personally don't feel bothered by, it still shows that you're apathetic. You either support the constitution, or you don't. There's no picking and choosing which part of the constitution you want to support. If we want to be a country that goes by the rule of law, then the country needs to follow the law of the land that was initially laid out for it.

This is a VERY good episode on "Big Brother" and how modern technology is being used (and abused) to keep covert surveillance on you and I. Whether you're a believer in "Conspiracy Theories" (as they call it) or not, this is a good watch. There are interviews conducted with engineers who develop this cutting edge technology, and will sell it to just about anyone; government agencies, private firms, etc, if the price is right. It's actually very disturbing.

I'll post the link to the first video for informative purposes, if you're interested in checking it out.

I don't give a rat's patootie if they tap the phones of suspected terrorists overseas calling into the US. Heck, I want them to do this. In a war, you spy on the enemy. When that enemy interacts with US citizens, those interactions will be spied upon.

I don't intend to interact with international terrorists, so I don't expect to be eavesdropped on. If for some reason, one of my Danish friends is thought to be a terrorist, I guess the government is going to find out that I despise Gamel Dansk, but enjoy Carlsberg. meh.

I don't give a rat's patootie if they tap the phones of suspected terrorists overseas calling into the US. Heck, I want them to do this. In a war, you spy on the enemy. When that enemy interacts with US citizens, those interactions will be spied upon.

I don't intend to interact with international terrorists, so I don't expect to be eavesdropped on. If for some reason, one of my Danish friends is thought to be a terrorist, I guess the government is going to find out that I despise Gamel Dansk, but enjoy Carlsberg. meh.

Yeah, screw the fourth amendment. Who needs a warrant anyway, there are terrorists to catch!

"If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

They're doing a bit more than that. I know you're not a fan of Ventura, but I'd highly suggest you watch that episode. Government agencies are outsourcing their surveillance to the private sector.

I was just responding to your thread title which seemed to be a strawman of the argument opposing yours.

I would have an objection for a law enforcement effort to listen in on domestic conversations without a court authorizing it. I have no objection to a national security effort to spy on those overseas who would make war on us. The latter is not a Fourth Amendment issue.

It is important that we make a distinction between law enforcement actions directed at residents of the US and national security actions directed at enemies overseas. As long as they are monitoring terrorists overseas or (monitoring purely domestic calls with the proper permission received from a court), I don't have a problem with them listening in.

Now, if you can cite a case where the government has been overstepping those bounds, I'll jump in and complain with you.

And, no, I have no interest in listening to Jesse Ventura. I'd prefer a more trusted source or a primary source.

I was just responding to your thread title which seemed to be a strawman of the argument opposing yours.

I would have an objection for a law enforcement effort to listen in on domestic conversations without a court authorizing it. I have no objection to a national security effort to spy on those overseas who would make war on us. The latter is not a Fourth Amendment issue.

It is important that we make a distinction between law enforcement actions directed at residents of the US and national security actions directed at enemies overseas. As long as they are monitoring terrorists overseas or (monitoring purely domestic calls with the proper permission received from a court), I don't have a problem with them listening in.

Now, if you can cite a case where the government has been overstepping those bounds, I'll jump in and complain with you.

And, no, I have no interest in listening to Jesse Ventura. I'd prefer a more trusted source or a primary source.

Well now you're just putting whatever issues you have with Ventura into the mix. If you were to watch the video, you'll find plenty of credible sources, including the Director of InfraGard and many employees of InfraGard. Have you heard of InfraGard? InfraGard is a private business that does business with the FBI to conduct surveillance on the general public.

There are 32,000 members of this group, working directly with the FBI, exchanging information back and fourth. Remember, these individuals are regular CITIZENS who have no security clearance. Back in November of 2001, Gov. Gray Davis announced a terror threat to California bridges. Davis' information came from his brother - a member of InfraGard. A member of InfraGard had obtained this information before any elected official in the entire state of California. Now how do you figure that?

The Government does MUCH more than simply listen to phone calls coming in from suspected terrorist countries. If you want to deny that, then ask former Air Force Lieutenant Jeff Dahlstrom. When he was calling his bank at Wells Fargo, he had warned his Wells Fargo banker not go to downtown in Portland next week, because there was going to be a drill where the government was going to simulate setting off a nuclear bomb. When he said the trigger word, it activated the system, which notified the Secret Service, who actually came out and interviewed him. They had a transcript of every word said on the telephone, inquiring to him about what he was talking about. He later confirmed with the bank that they did not report this to any agency. I would say that's sufficient enough to show that everyday phone conversations ARE being recorded. Now THIS time of interference with our 4th Amendment right is exactly what I am standing out against. This is a blatant violation. The worst thing is, the spy work is being turned over to private corporations, not our government. Many are run by companies like SAIC or CACI.

Our intelligence community is turning into a profit business. 70% of intelligence goes to the private sector. Now these businesses do not have to abide by the same rules as the government. Do you not believe that this type of activity will ever be abused? Regardless, even if you say, "Well, ok. I'm fine with the government listening to certain key words on the telephone to check for terrorism activity." Well my question is, where does it stop? Where is the line drawn? Where's the icing on the cake that says "It's gone too far?"

Have you ever heard the phrase of "Never let the camel get his nose under the tent, because rest assured, you will eventually have the whole camel in the tent."?

Many of us ex-servicemen signed various confidentiality agreements when we got our clearances. That's why there aren't too many on-line sea stories and those that are are about the USS Skinnerback or the UstaFish.

Well now you're just putting whatever issues you have with Ventura into the mix. If you were to watch the video, you'll find plenty of credible sources, including the Director of InfraGard and many employees of InfraGard. Have you heard of InfraGard? InfraGard is a private business that does business with the FBI to conduct surveillance on the general public.

There are 32,000 members of this group, working directly with the FBI, exchanging information back and fourth. Remember, these individuals are regular CITIZENS who have no security clearance. Back in November of 2001, Gov. Gray Davis announced a terror threat to California bridges. Davis' information came from his brother - a member of InfraGard. A member of InfraGard had obtained this information before any elected official in the entire state of California. Now how do you figure that?

The Government does MUCH more than simply listen to phone calls coming in from suspected terrorist countries. If you want to deny that, then ask former Air Force Lieutenant Jeff Dahlstrom. When he was calling his bank at Wells Fargo, he had warned his Wells Fargo banker not go to downtown in Portland next week, because there was going to be a drill where the government was going to simulate setting off a nuclear bomb. When he said the trigger word, it activated the system, which notified the Secret Service, who actually came out and interviewed him. They had a transcript of every word said on the telephone, inquiring to him about what he was talking about. He later confirmed with the bank that they did not report this to any agency. I would say that's sufficient enough to show that everyday phone conversations ARE being recorded. Now THIS time of interference with our 4th Amendment right is exactly what I am standing out against. This is a blatant violation. The worst thing is, the spy work is being turned over to private corporations, not our government. Many are run by companies like SAIC or CACI.

Our intelligence community is turning into a profit business. 70% of intelligence goes to the private sector. Now these businesses do not have to abide by the same rules as the government. Do you not believe that this type of activity will ever be abused? Regardless, even if you say, "Well, ok. I'm fine with the government listening to certain key words on the telephone to check for terrorism activity." Well my question is, where does it stop? Where is the line drawn? Where's the icing on the cake that says "It's gone too far?"

Have you ever heard the phrase of "Never let the camel get his nose under the tent, because rest assured, you will eventually have the whole camel in the tent."?

He probably has sources why we should believe our government had something to do with the Towers coming down.

Give me a scholarly piece or a (relatively) unbiased new article with sources. Otherwise, I'll just treat claims that government agents are bugging purely domestic calls without permission from a judge as just so much tin with which to make foil and move on.

No, I am going to dismiss what he claims are facts. If the source is not credible, neither are his "facts."

On edit: I am ignoring wikipedia also. It is not a credible source when it comes to controversy. It's wonderful for information that is not in dispute, but downright unreliable on contentious stuff.

Based on the NYT article: Great, it struck down the tapping of purely domestic calls without proper court authorization. System worked. Moving on.

I'm going to stop talking about whatever evidence he presents on the show, because it's obviously going no where with you. You asked for specific, unbiased sources, so I posted them. Now tell me, are you arguing because you really want to debate? Or are you just going to defend your point to the grave, regardless of what evidence of facts are brought up? I will admit that I will concede to you being correct if I truly felt you were, but I do not. I believe the evidence is substantial enough to show that the Government is CLEARLY misusing it's authority, especially when it comes to outsourcing their surveillance to the private sector.

On your edit:

So you see that it HAS happened, right? If it's happened once, who is to say it's not happening ALL of the time? Especially with the private sector conducting 75% of the surveillance. My question is, WHO is governing these agencies to make sure they don't step out of line? Themselves?

Here's an article that talks about George Bush even admitting to giving this operation the green light.

And this is exactly the thing. If it hasn't been brought to the attention of the media or the court, you're not going to hear about it! You're only going to hear about the events that have already been brought to mainstream attention!

You may want to move on, and that's fine. I, however, feel that the government and it's civilian counterparts in the private sector are continuing to abuse the system to this day. That's where it ends. Of course, I can only speculate, but given the previous evidence and history of what has already occurred, I lean toward the thought that it's still happening, and that our rights are being violated on a regular basis. If cases have already been brought in front of the court, who is to say how many cases that have not even made it to the court, or the media?

Back in the good ol days when the gooberment via FBI and that crossdressing director of there's, tapped a phone, you could tell by the crackling and junk on the line. Let's go back to around 1970 in Baltimore. Baltimore had it's own group of the Black Panthers. My mother was working as a journalist-of-sorts for a hippy newspaper, though she wasn't a "real" hippy. She liked writing and it was a fun job with alot of interesting charactors. Well she was so good that the Baltimore Black Panthers trained her to use some sort of machine so she could put together their newsletters. My, was her ( and my dad's) phone line one crackling hissy noise maker during this period! Her father ( my granddad) used to call and he would always say hello to the FBI agents, as in a " hello there FBI guys! hows it going?" kind of thing.

The government has had for many, many years now a system that looks into almost ALL phone conversations, and if certain key words are used, the conversation is flagged and forwarded to someone to review.
Why on earth do you think the government is up in arms about encryption over the internet, and they now want all companies that provide encryption software to give the government 'back door access' to people's information? It's because they can not as easily as phone tapping look at what you are doing on the internet, especially if it's encrypted (in which it is illegal to de-crypt an encrypted message not meant for you).

EVERY phone call made in the US has been routed through dedicated lines to NSA for over 20 years. My father worked for Bell his whole life, and I practically grew up in a central office--I've seen the equipment.

If you don't think the Intelligence community doesn't have the computational power to key-word search EVERY single phone call (land line and cell) made in the USA, real-time, then you have absolutely no clue as to how telecom works, how supercomputing works, or how digital information processing works.

This is no "conspiracy theory". It is operational fact, and has been for nearly 2 decades, ever since the telecom systems in this country completed their conversion over to digital ESS switching systems in the early 1990's.

Wake up people. How else do you think they get complete transcripts for conversations that occurred weeks BEFORE an investigation is started and warrents are issued? This isn't rocket science, folks.

Either the phone companies are re-routing all calls to the intelligence agencies for real-time analysis and databasing, or the FBI and NSA are capable of time travel. Which do YOU think makes more sense?

Last edited by Dreamer; 11-08-2010 at 01:09 AM.

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”
–Mark Twain

Sharing...

Not to mention that there are a few foreign countries we share practically all intelligence with, such as : Britain, Canada and Australia. We also collect against them, and they us. Then we share. No warrant required by either nation to collect against foreign countries.

He probably has sources why we should believe our government had something to do with the Towers coming down.

Give me a scholarly piece or a (relatively) unbiased new article with sources. Otherwise, I'll just treat claims that government agents are bugging purely domestic calls without permission from a judge as just so much tin with which to make foil and move on.

I just had an epiphany. Remember when we used "rabbit ears" on our TV's, and you could sometimes enhance the reception by putting tinfoil on it? The Tinfoil hatters have increased the effects of the NWO on themselves!! People USE LEAD HATS INSTEAD!!!

Edit: I'll be the tinfoil also increases the efficiency of the mind reading satilites. They've tricked us into using something that helps them!!

Last edited by PrayingForWar; 11-10-2010 at 09:44 AM.

If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

I just had an epiphany. Remember when we used "rabbit ears" on our TV's, and you could sometimes enhance the reception by putting tinfoil on it? The Tinfoil hatters have increased the effects on the NWO on themselves!! People USE LEAD HATS INSTEAD!!!